Functional Outcome after Laparoscopic Posterior Sutured Rectopexy Versus Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Six-year Follow-up of a Double-blind, Randomized Single-center Study
Summary: Background: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) for rectal prolapse has been implemented to reduce postoperative bowel symptoms. The preoperative-to-postoperative change in a double-blinded, randomized study comparing it to laparoscopic posterior sutured rectopexy (LPSR) found no si...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Elsevier
2019-11-01
|
Series: | EClinicalMedicine |
Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589537019301580 |
id |
doaj-93a1ecbeb81f4d4a8383c10f5144b512 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-93a1ecbeb81f4d4a8383c10f5144b5122020-11-25T02:53:57ZengElsevierEClinicalMedicine2589-53702019-11-01161822Functional Outcome after Laparoscopic Posterior Sutured Rectopexy Versus Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Six-year Follow-up of a Double-blind, Randomized Single-center StudyJin Hidaka0Hossam Elfeki1Jakob Duelund-Jakobsen2Søren Laurberg3Lilli Lundby4Department of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Corresponding author at: Department of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, 8200 Aarhus N, Denmark.Department of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of surgery, Mansoura University Hospital, Mansoura, EgyptDepartment of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, DenmarkDepartment of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, DenmarkDepartment of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, DenmarkSummary: Background: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) for rectal prolapse has been implemented to reduce postoperative bowel symptoms. The preoperative-to-postoperative change in a double-blinded, randomized study comparing it to laparoscopic posterior sutured rectopexy (LPSR) found no significant difference between the two procedures after one year. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term functional outcomes. Methods: From November 2006–January 2014, 75 patients were randomized to LVMR (n = 37) or LPSR (n = 38). In March 2017, questionnaires containing constipation symptom score (PAC-SYM), quality of life score (PAC-QoL), obstructed defecation score (ODS), Cleveland clinic constipation and incontinence scores (CCCS, CCIS) were mailed to all the patients included in the RCT. Prolapse recurrences and mesh complications were recorded. Finding: Sixty-nine patients were available for long-term follow-up. Questionnaires were completed by 64 patients (94.4%). The median follow-up was 6.1 years. The total PAC-QoL was significantly lower in the LVMR group 0.26 (0.14–0.83) compared to the LPSR group 0.93(0.32–1.61)(P = 0.008). The total PAC-SYM was significantly lower in the LVMR group 0.5 (0.21–0.87) compared to the LPSR group 1.0 (0.5–1.5)(P = 0.031). Except for CCIS, the ODS and the CCCS significantly favored the LVMR group at six years (P = 0.011 & 0.017). Only three(8.82%) patients in the LVMR group developed recurrence compared to seven(23.33%) in the LPSR group (P = 0.111). Interpretation: The long-term functional outcome after LVMR is superior to that after LPSR. Larger multicenter studies are warranted. Funding: None. Keywords: Rectal prolapse, Ventral mesh rectopexy, Posterior sutured rectopexy, Functional outcome, Long-term follow-up, Randomized controlled trialhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589537019301580 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Jin Hidaka Hossam Elfeki Jakob Duelund-Jakobsen Søren Laurberg Lilli Lundby |
spellingShingle |
Jin Hidaka Hossam Elfeki Jakob Duelund-Jakobsen Søren Laurberg Lilli Lundby Functional Outcome after Laparoscopic Posterior Sutured Rectopexy Versus Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Six-year Follow-up of a Double-blind, Randomized Single-center Study EClinicalMedicine |
author_facet |
Jin Hidaka Hossam Elfeki Jakob Duelund-Jakobsen Søren Laurberg Lilli Lundby |
author_sort |
Jin Hidaka |
title |
Functional Outcome after Laparoscopic Posterior Sutured Rectopexy Versus Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Six-year Follow-up of a Double-blind, Randomized Single-center Study |
title_short |
Functional Outcome after Laparoscopic Posterior Sutured Rectopexy Versus Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Six-year Follow-up of a Double-blind, Randomized Single-center Study |
title_full |
Functional Outcome after Laparoscopic Posterior Sutured Rectopexy Versus Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Six-year Follow-up of a Double-blind, Randomized Single-center Study |
title_fullStr |
Functional Outcome after Laparoscopic Posterior Sutured Rectopexy Versus Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Six-year Follow-up of a Double-blind, Randomized Single-center Study |
title_full_unstemmed |
Functional Outcome after Laparoscopic Posterior Sutured Rectopexy Versus Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Six-year Follow-up of a Double-blind, Randomized Single-center Study |
title_sort |
functional outcome after laparoscopic posterior sutured rectopexy versus ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse: six-year follow-up of a double-blind, randomized single-center study |
publisher |
Elsevier |
series |
EClinicalMedicine |
issn |
2589-5370 |
publishDate |
2019-11-01 |
description |
Summary: Background: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) for rectal prolapse has been implemented to reduce postoperative bowel symptoms. The preoperative-to-postoperative change in a double-blinded, randomized study comparing it to laparoscopic posterior sutured rectopexy (LPSR) found no significant difference between the two procedures after one year. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term functional outcomes. Methods: From November 2006–January 2014, 75 patients were randomized to LVMR (n = 37) or LPSR (n = 38). In March 2017, questionnaires containing constipation symptom score (PAC-SYM), quality of life score (PAC-QoL), obstructed defecation score (ODS), Cleveland clinic constipation and incontinence scores (CCCS, CCIS) were mailed to all the patients included in the RCT. Prolapse recurrences and mesh complications were recorded. Finding: Sixty-nine patients were available for long-term follow-up. Questionnaires were completed by 64 patients (94.4%). The median follow-up was 6.1 years. The total PAC-QoL was significantly lower in the LVMR group 0.26 (0.14–0.83) compared to the LPSR group 0.93(0.32–1.61)(P = 0.008). The total PAC-SYM was significantly lower in the LVMR group 0.5 (0.21–0.87) compared to the LPSR group 1.0 (0.5–1.5)(P = 0.031). Except for CCIS, the ODS and the CCCS significantly favored the LVMR group at six years (P = 0.011 & 0.017). Only three(8.82%) patients in the LVMR group developed recurrence compared to seven(23.33%) in the LPSR group (P = 0.111). Interpretation: The long-term functional outcome after LVMR is superior to that after LPSR. Larger multicenter studies are warranted. Funding: None. Keywords: Rectal prolapse, Ventral mesh rectopexy, Posterior sutured rectopexy, Functional outcome, Long-term follow-up, Randomized controlled trial |
url |
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589537019301580 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT jinhidaka functionaloutcomeafterlaparoscopicposteriorsuturedrectopexyversusventralmeshrectopexyforrectalprolapsesixyearfollowupofadoubleblindrandomizedsinglecenterstudy AT hossamelfeki functionaloutcomeafterlaparoscopicposteriorsuturedrectopexyversusventralmeshrectopexyforrectalprolapsesixyearfollowupofadoubleblindrandomizedsinglecenterstudy AT jakobduelundjakobsen functionaloutcomeafterlaparoscopicposteriorsuturedrectopexyversusventralmeshrectopexyforrectalprolapsesixyearfollowupofadoubleblindrandomizedsinglecenterstudy AT sørenlaurberg functionaloutcomeafterlaparoscopicposteriorsuturedrectopexyversusventralmeshrectopexyforrectalprolapsesixyearfollowupofadoubleblindrandomizedsinglecenterstudy AT lillilundby functionaloutcomeafterlaparoscopicposteriorsuturedrectopexyversusventralmeshrectopexyforrectalprolapsesixyearfollowupofadoubleblindrandomizedsinglecenterstudy |
_version_ |
1724723534537687040 |